Stuart's initial request to the AFL is that his sons (he has another son, James) be aligned to Port's Academy. He was also exploring his Aboriginal heritage.
Why would the AFL care what Stuart wants though in all seriousness
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

Stuart's initial request to the AFL is that his sons (he has another son, James) be aligned to Port's Academy. He was also exploring his Aboriginal heritage.
Indigenous heritage trumps a lot of things in todays society.Why would the AFL care what Stuart wants though in all seriousness
Why?It will be a different proposition during the trade period without Ken in the picture this time.
Because Ken's bullshit "You've gotta give something to get something" bendover ethos toward trading probably echoes through the joint.Why?
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
No, no, no, no……we’ll do our best to get the player home because family is so important.Memo PAFC.
This is how you engineer a Trade.
I wonder how we can get 1st round picks 16, 17 & 18 - all first-round picks to get Kossie - 
I'm sure that corrupt organisation will do us no favours. We are irrelevant in their priorities.Granting Hawks access may set precedence for Port with Dougie Cochrane?
AFL goes to the best of its own drum around these things, but surely it couldn’t hurt our chances!
If that’s true then that is ridiculous. Port can’t be held to ransom and should’ve done something about this (unsure if they could do anything). But if that’s true that’s absolute bullsh!t and just shows the ridiculous vic centric narrativeWe did that with Houston.
None of that helps when you have a top player manager then coming in and threatening to encourage their players to avoid your club. Even over the top of the actual manager for the player being traded.
At which point we should have walked out and refused to negotiate a second longer and advise Houston petty threats from his manager ended the trade.We did that with Houston.
None of that helps when you have a top player manager then coming in and threatening to encourage their players to avoid your club. Even over the top of the actual manager for the player being traded.
Melbourne are unlikely to get rat-****ed by the head of the players agency.Houston is gone, get the fck over it. The deal wasn’t great but I think we actually did as well as we could’ve out of the picks plus Richards. But it’s still a broken record here , going over the same shit, and we should’ve done this and should’ve done that.
And for all those comments praising Brad Green for his comments, we talked tough initially too, maybe wait and see how it actually plays out first. I can guarantee you that Melbourne aren’t getting three first round picks for Kozzie Pickett.
Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
We have spent 10 years moving our first round picks around to target specific players in the draft or trade. If we wanted good young talls we would have gone after them
It doesnt fit with trying to stay touching distance with the top 8 every year so we don't do it
And yes Van Rooyen looks like a big miss at the moment, he has kicked 30 goals both years.
Not unpopular I'd say, it's about using the entire ground to your advantage and doing so requires massive effort to ensure you constantly provide an option. Last year was only DBJ that was a hard working small forward. Now you have SPP, Richards and Berry too who are able to cover ground.Unpopular opinion coming.
You don't really need good tall forwards anymore.
Brisbane and Sydney being most recent grand finalists and Collingwood the year before are proof of this.
It's about the system. And we had none in the Dixon era.
It should reported to the Afl who should warn them once & then suspend them for indiscretions. Player managers have way too much power. There should be a strict code of conduct that is administered & monitored by the Afl.If that’s true then that is ridiculous. Port can’t be held to ransom and should’ve done something about this (unsure if they could do anything). But if that’s true that’s absolute bullsh!t and just shows the ridiculous vic centric narrative
Melbourne are unlikely to get rat-****ed by the head of the players agency.
They won't get three first rounders but they'll go close.
Unpopular opinion coming.
You don't really need good tall forwards anymore.
Brisbane and Sydney being most recent grand finalists and Collingwood the year before are proof of this.
It's about the system. And we had none in the Dixon era.
You dont trade established guns with 6-8 years of footy left in them. Especially the quality of those two. We shouldnt have traded a future first for soldo, ratagulea and sweet or for Luko. Those two decisions will set us back for years.Well we need to hit the draft hard before Tasmania comes in. That means sacrificing Butters and Bergman in the process as they are the only players in our squad with any trade value.
We didn't lose to Collingwood by 15 goals because of the list. Our list is simply impossible to assess under the current coaching setup. We've seen it play some scintillating footy and then some of the worst footy i've ever seen.